The Virginian-Pilot
©
CHESAPEAKE
Ryan Frederick's attorney argued Monday that an audio recording suggests police knew about an unreported break-in at his client's home just before the ill-fated drug raid in which a detective was killed.
The burglary occurred days before police raided Frederick's home in Portlock on Jan. 17. They had a search warrant, based on an informant's tips about a marijuana-growing operation. Frederick is accused of killing Detective Jarrod Shivers that night as he and other officers tried to enter.
James Broccoletti, Frederick's attorney, renewed a motion Monday in Chesapeake Circuit Court to have the search warrant thrown out. Judge Marjorie A.T. Arrington declined to reconsider the motion.
Broccoletti has argued the warrant - and all the evidence found under its auspices - should be suppressed because the police informant had burglarized Frederick's property to get drug evidence and the magistrate who granted the warrant was never told about the police informant's role in the break-in. Prosecutors have already acknowledged that "more than one person, including the confidential informant in this case" had broken into Frederick's detached garage.
Frederick, 29, has maintained that he fired twice at what he thought were intruders breaking through his front door.
The night Frederick was arrested, he was placed in a police car and a recorder was turned on, Broccoletti said. The recording is of Frederick trying to tell police about an earlier break-in at his home.
A detective on the recording replied: "We know that," Broccoletti said.
At another time, the detective states: "First off, we know your house had been broken into. OK?"
"Two separate occasions he tells the defendant that he knew the home had been burglarized," Broccoletti argued.
The special prosecutors in the case said there is nothing whatsoever to suggest police knew at the time who broke in or who was involved. They said police learned months later that the parties involved included one of their informants.
Frederick is scheduled to stand trial Jan. 20 on charges of capital murder, use of a firearm and manufacturing marijuana. He is being held in the Chesapeake Correctional Center.
John Hopkins, (757) 222-5221, john.hopkins@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
You guys still miss the point
Sorry, Keith, if I'm sometimes not as clear as you'd like. I've written & talked this way since childhood. Sort of a scatter shot brain, I guess. No ego trip. Richard, you just don't get it; you'll still stuck on race. In photos Ryan appears to be the class nerd, who got teased, had sand kicked in his face, his lunch money stolen & never had a girl friend. I'm not saying he is or ever was any of these things. What I'm saying is that, to many persons, this is how he may appear. On the other hand, Charles Manson looked like evil personified. Perceptions lead to the presumption of assuming. Jury nullification is just the opposite of what should occur. We all take who we are, into the jury room. That's why diversity in experience, age, education, sex, religion, culture & to lesser degrees, race & ethnicity, are vital, to have a truly impartial jury. Yet that is rare, in & of itself. Have a good 1.
Does anyone else know where he's going?
Twomiler2 you need to rewrite your posts and explain where you are going and what your point you're trying make when you accuse some of us out here of a presumption of anything. I never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but most of here who post comments here aren't LEO's (former and active) with the presumption of a degree in psychology and an ego trip.
Ok twomiler, your right.
Ok twomiler, your right. Ryan Frederick is soooo lucky to have the benefits others of color would not receive. He must be smiling ear to ear tonight in his cell knowing his whiteness has gotten him this far. Sure, he has no freedom and his outlook is bleak to unsure. But hey, he's white. We all know being white in jail is a major plus. Add that in with killing a cop and your a huge hit on both sides. Lucky him.
Another Isolated Incident
The truth is that this is not an "Another Isolated Incident." I read Reason online and almost daily there is another story like this one. These drug cops are so EVIL that my post would be deleted if I even tried to describe a small portion of how vile and subhuman these drug cops are. Normal people have as much chance understanding the minds of these sick creatures as placing themselves into the mind of a rapist. If what twomiler2 says is true then Jury nullification is the only just action to take. To do otherwise would places yourself on the same sick level as the drug cops.
Reread my post
All my posts, for that my matter. The only time I bring race into my comments on an issue, is when the article itself is related to race as an issue. Again, you have the presumption to feel you can assume what I'm doing, even if what you want to believe I'm doing is in direct contrast to what it is I'm actually doing. I spelled out, in plain English, what I was doing. If you or someone else still fails to understand this, then it is up to you to find out why you are unable or unwilling to comprehend. You can't see reality due to your refusal to see my comments as anything outside of your preconception. This is why I submitted that some may not see what others see in the Frederick case. Some see what they wish to see, due to their conscious or unconscious presumptions.
In reality twomiler2
Well, what was the point of listing the names you mentioned if not to infer that race was a factor since RF is white. You have brought up the race issue in posts on other subjects. You proved presumption in your post that RF will get more of a fair trial than someone of a different race or creed. You can't admit it though. RF could have been named twomiler2 and I still would have defended his actions.
The inclination to see shadiness is a two way street. LE has no problem making assumptions in the negative on the actions of a civilians such as Chet Szmecki and Dan Moore. Norfolk paid Chet $15,000 today and Dan $10,000 because they couldn't admit that their LEO's "assumed" rather than know for sure whether they were breaking the law. I believe CPD broke the law and tried to cover it up, but no one in that department will suffer any consequences. That's the sad part.
In Reality Keith,
my comments & name usage served to prove the presumption of those who assume, such as you did, in this matter. A name is just that. It doesn't denote race; often, it doesn't denote ethnicity or culture either. I have a neighbor, Black in race, whose given name is Korean & last name Hebrew. I grew up with Filipino Americans with Irish surnames. I worked with a White guy named Kareem Jackson. 1 with an inclination to see shadiness in law enforcement, may make assumptions in the negative on police actions. 1 with biases,(whether conscious or unconscious), toward another person, different, in someway, than 1's self, may make negative assumptions about that person's actions. Again, I didn't use race as an issue. You did.
Again Richard,
you, not I, mentioned race. I am an ex leo. I've been in situations in which my next move could decide whether 1 lives or dies. Have you ever been tear gassed? I have. It's not easy to maintain one's sense of surroundings when 1 is a trained military & leo veteran if sprayed with tear gas. How do you think a 17yr old mentally disturbed child would handle tear gas? Think. Please think. If 1 is to look at the info given to the general public, in each case, 1 could easily see possible problems with the police actions in the case of the 17yr old. Reread the stories on that case. Then ask 3 questions. Where, when & how. Ask these concerning the statement as to when the police entered, didn't see the weapon, & the child was seated. Where, when & how.
doc continued
In the absense of a stand your ground law, it is legally inferred that you have the duty to retreat. Remember you have no right to use a firearm to protect property, if you retreat when someone breaks in, more than likely they are just there to rob your house. That is why cops and lawyers will tell you if someone breaks in, make sure they are all the way inside the house and make sure they're dead. That way they can't say that it wasn't justifible homicide. I had a friend that was a cop, man said he was going to kill him after he got out of prison. Man got out, went to friends house, was coming in the front door, friend shot him in the hand, man backed out, sued my friend and won 20 million dollars. So in this case, Ryan shot someone breaking down his front door, NOT an overt act of imminent danger, he used a firearm, killed a person OUTSIDE his house, it is murder.
Doc
The case law doesn't exactly say what you said. Read this part again.
The “bare fear” of serious bodily injury, or even death,
however well-grounded, will not justify the taking of human
life. . . . “There must [also] be some overt act indicative of
imminent danger at the time.” (citations omitted). In other
words, a defendant “must wait till some overt act is done[,] .
. . till the danger becomes imminent.” (citation omitted).
In the context of a self-defense plea, “imminent danger” is
defined as “[a]n immediate, real threat to one's safety . . .
.” (citation omitted). “There must be . . . some act menacing
present peril . . . [and] [t]he act . . . must be of such a
character as to afford a reasonable ground for believing there
is a design . . . to do some serious bodily harm, and imminent
danger of carrying such design into immediate execution.”
Commonwealth v. Sands, 262 Va. 724, 729, 553 S.E.2d 733, ___ (2001).
Someone breaking down your door is NOT an overt act of iminent danger. As for duty to retreat, look up the stand your ground law. VA does not have one that says you can stand your ground, therefore it is legally inferred that yo